The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1887-02-02
PROTESTING TAX PAYERS.
KNOCKED OUT ON THE FIRST ROUND,
BUT WILL RALLY ON TIME.
The Most Interesting Case that Has
Been Before Our Courts I'm Many n
Day...Both Money and Principle
rider OF the Court.

About sixty tax payers of Ninety-Six town.
ship have united in an action agninst the
County Treasurer to recover the Railroad tax
which they paid under protest. Treasurer
Perrin is only nominally the defendant the
real defendants I'm interest being the Atlantic,
Greenville and Western Railroad Company,
and Susong & &C. The Railroad Act provides
that tax payers who conceive that railroad
tax Is illegal or unconstitutional shall never
thcleSs pay the tax under protest, and bring
suit against the County Treasurer to have
their lax refunded; the County Treasurer
meanwhile having deposited the protested
taxes in the State treasury.
The protesting tax payers who have brought
this suit have paid sums varying from 80
". W. Butler and s. MEG. Simkins Of the
Edgefield Bar. Mr.. Bcnet, Of the Abberille
Bar, represents the Railroad and Susong Il
Co.,, and Mr. j. l.. Orr, Of the Greenville Bar,
Stoney TO represent the County Treasurer;
The complaint was served on the l0th o.
January, 1887. 1t is a long and voluminous
complaint and alleges especially:
not complied with in the organization OF the
Railroad Company.
b. That the provisions Of the charter MS to
the route of the road were not complied with.
c. That the petition filed with the County
Commissioners requesting that they order an
election on subscription or no subscription
contained numerous names which were
placed there fraudulently, without the con-
sent or knowledge of the parties themselves,
by others who had no right 10 do so, and that
other names were repeated.
d. That when the election was held, and
the result declared in favor Of the Railroad
tax, many votes " ere cast Illegally and fraud
nlcntly-a number sufficient to vitate the
election.
c. That the Act chartcr!ng the Railroad Is
in direct violation of Section 20, Article 2. OF
the Constitution Of the State and OF Section
lS, Article of the same.
The above are the main allegations of the
attorneys notice that he would move before
Jud .e Fraser for an order requiring them TO
make the above allegations more definite ana
and certain. 1t was not enough, for instance
to allege generally that numerous names
were frauduently placed on the petition. or
that many votes were cast Illegally and
! fraudulentlr; but that 1t was necessary 70
allcge specifically the names that appeared
| there fraudulently, and the votes that were
cast illegally and fraudulently; and similar
! ly as TO other allegations.
| The motion was heard by Judge Fraser on
Saturday night at his chamber, Messrs. But.
MesSrs Benet anil Orr for the deiendan1s.
The Judge took the papers, rcserving t1s de,
ciSion until Tuesday morning, when ne nled
the following order in favor of the defend
ants:
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA.
COUNTY OF ABBEvII.LE.
Jefferson Floyd, Fl; N; Spikes, and others, htGs,
urrr Of Abbcville county, defendant.
This case Is before me, Mt Chambers, on
motion on the part of defendant for an order
requiring the plaintiffs to make certain para.
graphs of the complaint more definite ana GER
tain.
After hearing argument Of counsel for plain
tiffs and defendant have come 10 the conclu-
sion that the principle on which these parTl-
graphs complained Of. II admitted to be cor
rect. would have justified, in place OF this al
ready long complaint even much shorter
statement, that the tax collected by de fend-
Io,,f q tN-
Illegal and that they were entitled to have 1t
refunded under The act.
While many of the facts have been stated,
there are quitea numbprof Settlements which
are mere conclusions Of law, Without any
statement of the sneclfic facts on which such
! conclusions rests Bliss Code, Pl. 2l2, 2l3:
! It is therefore ordered. that the complaint
he amended in the following particulars:
! Paragraph V. BY stating specifically the
facts by which plaintiffs claim that the pro
! visions Of Section three of The Act Of Dec. q,
1882 have not been complied with In the Or
ganiZation OF the "Sald company"
owners Of real estate in Nincty-SiX township
by stating the names of The persons which
were placed on said petition "fraudulently
and without their CONSENT and what names
Paragraph TX. by stating how many, and
whose votes were illegal and fraudulent, at
the election held on 2d January, 1856
| Paragraph XVII Ply stating In what re-
spcrt the route by which the said railroad Is
brin. constructed. Is in violation Of the pro-
visions of tho rhrrtrr.
| Paragraph XIX. Ry shifting by what feat,
urc in the said Act of the I.esis"tIre the sni q
articles Of the Constitution of South Carolina
/ Is violated.
IL is ordered, that plaintiffs have twenty,
! davs from service Of notice Of the ming ni
! this order with copy thereof. within which
to serve the amended complaint on defend
ant II. b. FRASER,
Presiding Judge.